Challenges of Local NGO Sustainability

8/12/2019 Challenges of Local NGO Sustainability

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/challenges-of-local-ngo-sustainability 1/12

Challenges of Local NGO Sustainability 1

Jerry VanSantDuke Center for International Development

Duke University

1 Introduction

I am honored to be among you today for what I hope will be a time of mutual learning.

The comedian George Burns once said that the secret to a first-rate speech is to have a good beginning and a good ending and then to keep them as close together as possible! In that spirit Iwill try not to ask you to listen to me too long in order that there will be time left to hear fromyou.

It will not be news to this audience that currently the role of non-governmental organizations(NGOs) is more critical and more strategic in the process of global human development than atany time before. I will talk some about why this is so because it will help us understand thechanging roles of NGOs, implications for building NGO capacity, and how NGOs can advancethe next step from capacity to sustainable roles in the development of a vibrant and free civilsociety.

My goal today is to highlight certain themes around which there is enormous expertise in thisroom. If these remarks help trigger a productive exchange of ideas and experience among youtoday and tomorrow, then I will count this keynote a success and hope you do as well.

I would like to begin by noting some background issues and contextual factors that make thetopic of local NGO capacity and sustainability so relevant today.

1.1 Changing NGO Roles

You all are aware of and, indeed, contributors to the evolution of NGOs through the generationsof activity described by David Korten as

- first, relief and welfare (involving primarily the delivery of inputs such as humanitarianassistance),

- second, small scale local development (involving service delivery and building of somelocal capacities for self-help, and- third, sustainable development systems (involving grassroots mobilization and policy

advocacy).

In his recent book, Worlds Apart , John Clark describes the same progression as moving from afocus on poor individuals to poor communities to poor societies.

1 Keynote remarks prepared for the USAID/PVC-ASHA Annual PVO Conference, 14 October, 2003



Page 2

The point, of course, is not that a later stage of this evolution is necessarily superior or that allPVOs and NGOs should strive to advance along this continuum. Each generation of activity isan important part of the development process, whether responding to humanitarian needs,supporting local development, or engaging in advocacy for policies that support voice andempowerment for civil society.

At the same time, however, there is growing recognition that, as stated in the current USAIDOffice of Private and Voluntary Cooperation (PVC) strategic plan, “the ability of NGO groups toinfluence national and sectoral policies is crucial to the viability of such groups and to thesuccess of their programs.”

1.2 The Emerging Focus on Civil Society and Governance

In his landmark book, Development as Freedom, Amartya Sen defines development as the process of expanding the real freedoms that people enjoy. These freedoms include political,economic, and social opportunity as well as transparency guarantees, and protective security.

Each of these freedoms requires both a healthy civil society and sound governance.Indeed, we have learned that good governance represents a critical path toward sustainablehuman development. The experience of many countries suggests that weak governance and sloweconomic development go hand-in-hand while improved governance fosters developmentsuccess. In short, governance matters!

The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) has put it this way: “The quality ofmanagement of a nation ’s economic, social, and political affairs, or governance, is the singlemost important influence on the extent to which its human and natural resources are used for the

benefit of all, now and in the future. ”

We know that good governance requires both citizen empowerment and the acceptance by thosewho govern of accountability to those who are served, with priorities based on broad societalconsensus. This means among other things that the voices of the poor and vulnerable are heardin the determination of policy and in the allocation of resources. The role of a free civil societyand all its elements as critical partners with government cannot be overemphasized.

Strengthening relations between government and citizens thus becomes a key leverage point forincreasing citizen access and influence. Two principal strategies to improve these relations arecreating linkages and building capacity. NGO’s are particularly well -placed to implement thesestrategies in local and regional settings. Many are doing it. And many of you are helping them.More on this later.

1.3 Contextual Factors

The context for development is ever changing. NGOs, like all effective organizations, mustendeavor to master the dynamic environment in which they pursue their missions. Five factorsin that environment that I would like to note briefly this morning are globalization, technology,networking, decentralization, and USAID/PVC strategic direction. Each of these factors presents

both challenge and opportunity.



Page 3

Globalization means the elimination or reduction of barriers to human interaction acrossnational boundaries. Its dimensions are economic, cultural, and political. As put by KofiAnnan, “Today’s real borders are not between nations, but b etween powerful and powerless, freeand fettered, privileged and humiliated.” We might add that development often is the ticketacross these borders.

Technology has made globalization possible by opening doors to the worldwide exchange ofinformation. For NGOs, technology enables organizational linkages, constituency mobilization,

public information, and fund raising in ways unimaginable in the very recent past.

Networking is an aspect of globalization and is a major strategic device for NGOs. Networkscontribute to adaptability and problem-solving. They can more swiftly discover and adapt newtechniques. Networking, as John Clark notes, does not mean working only with like-mindedgroups; it means building partnerships to tackle issues that would be impossible without

particular strategic alliances.

Decentralization and related development emphases on democracy and civil society create a particular opportunity for NGOs with core competence and credibility in mobilizing citizenvoice.

PVC’s strategy responds to and adds to the changing context we face. It builds on a recognitionof the role of NGOs in civil society, an increased emphasis on partnership, and recognition ofadvocacy as an essential program activity.

Each of these contextual factors changes the playing field for NGOs in significant ways. Youknow this and you will be returning to these themes as this conference proceeds.

2 NGO Capacity

Recognition of the changing – and important – role of NGOs for development and anunderstanding of the changing context in which they work has led to a growing focus on NGOcapacity as an agenda for NGO partners be they donors, international NGOs or PVOs, or othersupport organizations.

Part of this growing attention is a proliferation of tools or methodologies for measuring NGOcapacity. Generally, the creators of these tools correctly recognize that how they are used may

be more important than any assessment results themselves. Like any good process tool,organizational assessment can facilitate and provide structure to a participatory process oforganizational diagnosis and change. In fact, the USAID/PVC strategic plan cites as a lessonlearned the reality that organizational assessments in and of themselves can catalyze change.

Assessment tools usually offer a set of measurement categories or indicators. Often these arequalitative so that measurement takes place along a defined descriptive scale of development.Obviously, the specific items worth measuring will vary depending on the nature and purpose ofthe organization.



Page 4

Likewise, benchmarks along a scale of, say, financial strength, need to be adapted to the contextof a specific organization and its own stage of development.

The process of defining measurement categories and descriptive po ints of development in thosecategories is part of the potential learning process of organizational assessment. Therefore

organizational self-assessment or an interactive process involving both outside partners and the NGO being assessed is usually more useful than any kind of external evaluation. After all, themost important clients of any evaluation are the managers who can buy-in to and then act on theinformation.

This said, it may be useful to consider a set of generic categories of NGO organizationalcapacity, recognizing the importance of adapting these to any particular setting.

I have reviewed a number of the excellent organizational assessment tools proposed in recentyears (several developed with USAID assistance). There is a great deal of similarity amongthese frameworks reflecting an emerging consensus on the attributes that make for effective and

sustainable organizations. Drawing from this good work I propose the following composite set ofmeasurement categories in three clusters, organizational resources, organizational performance,and organizational sustainability.

Organizational Resources represents the attributes an organization possesses or controls andconsists of its basic legal structure, assured access to human, financial, technical, and otherresources, and its management systems and structure, including performance managementsystems. In short, this category captures what the organization has to work with at a given pointin time.

Organizational Performance measures an organization ’s program s, services, or other impacts asa result of how effectively it employs its organizational resources. For NGOs, external relations(for example, networks and linkages) and the empowerment of constituents or broader civilsociety frequently are intended outcomes. Organizational performance assesses both efficiencyand effectiveness or, in short, what an organization does with the resources it possesses.

Organizational Sustainability incorporates more forward-looking attributes such as autonomy,learning capacity, and leadership which, in turn, help ensure sustainability and self-reliance inthe future. This category attempts to capture where the organization is going in the future. Wewill return to the issue of organizational sustainability later on.

Now, in case any of you want a magic bullet for external organizational assessment, let mesuggest the following: Ask members of the organization from the top echelon to the bottomwhat the mission of that organization is. In most cases you will get no coherent answer or a mixof contradictory answers. In the rare case that you get a confident and consistent articulation ofthe mission, vision, or purpose of the organization you will know you have a winner. Thismethod, which can be done in an hour or less, will tell you more about the quality and,especially, the future of an organization than most high powered (and expensive) externalorganizational assessments!



Page 5

3 NGOs and Advocacy

If, for example, an NGO involved in advocacy or planning to do so was to engage in anassessment process, then it would probably want to generate some relevant indicators in theorganizational resources and organizational performance categories as a basis for benchmarking

and defining a spectrum of performance expectations. Typically such an index ofaccomplishment might range from a defined level of advocacy-based research and analysiscapacity through some specific communications and influence activities (such as, for example,what Luis Crouch, my former colleague at RTI International, called “the power of convocation”)to, finally, some distinct policy changes or new legislation resulting from the advocacy efforts.

Because advocacy is such an important activity for NGOs moving into the policy arena or, inClark’s terms, intending to have broad societal impact, the topic is worth some more detailedattention here.

Legitimate NGOs typically are driven by values and focus on social change. Their flexibility and

mobility may vest them with particular opportunity to take and learn from strategic risks. Theseand other common NGO attributes create unique opportunities for policy influence, especially atthe local level where, as Julie Fisher notes, government may be more susceptible to independentsector influence.

3.1 Government Policy Toward NGOs

There are, of course, great variations in government receptiveness to NGO voice be it in the formof well-researched policy advocacy or the pleadings of loosely organized pressure groups. Atthe extreme, governments may actively repress all independent citizen voice, including NGOs,except as they serve as a mouthpiece for official policy.

More commonly, government may effectively control NGOs by co-opting them with eithercarrot or stick kinds of incentives (and corresponding disincentives to straying from the script).This approach is particularly common when a controlling government sees political benefit infacilitating expansion of NGO service delivery activities.

In a more positive vein, governments may encourage NGOs to engage in gap-filling servicedelivery activities. This, in fact, is very common at local levels in the United States where non-

profit organizations play a large role in such services as homeless shelters, health services, andaffordable housing.

In some cases, where mutual trust develops, government may invite NGOs to the policy makingtable to benefit from their experience and, in some cases, research on a public policy issue. Ofcourse, such a partnership is rarely characterized by an adversarial stance on key policyquestions, a dilemma to which we shall return later.

The nature of government policy toward the NGO sector is determined by a number of factorsincluding the type of regime, political culture, and the degree of political stability in a givencountry. As you would expect, pluralism and political space” correlate with a healthy and active

NGO sector.



Page 6

3.2 NGO Policy toward Government

Meanwhile, NGOs themselves also have a choice regarding their policy toward government.Some may consciously choose political isolation in order to focus on building an appropriate

base of support, independent networks, and their own approaches to development. NGOs that

adopt this strategy normally are focused on service delivery more than advocacy. In some cases,however, it can be a tactic to maintain legitimacy in countries where governments are seen asfailing or corrupt.

A second choice is cooperation with government, whether at the project or strategic level. Thisstrategy provides leverage for both sides and, at its best, allows for constructive dialogue ondevelopment issues. As noted earlier, however, cooperating NGOs may feel comfortable onlywith a limited set of policy influence tactics – those that are not likely to upset the cooperativerelationship with government that, among other things, is an important source of funding. Isense that most USAID registered PVOs have adopted this strategy of cooperation.

A third strategy, not necessarily contradictory with cooperation, is one of more active policyadvocacy where an NGO engages in legal and lobbying efforts and even electoral politics. Thisapproach probably is most often associated with some environmental groups in this country butthere are, of course, any number of non-governmental interest groups that choose this optionwhether or not they engage in any programmatic activity of the type we would associate withdevelopmental NGOs.

These strategies are not mutually exclusive; an organization may try to take all these paths at thesame time. But there are likely to be some bumps in the road.

3.3 Successful NGO Involvement in the Policy Arena

Research into NGO policy involvement tells us a good bit about the organizational attributes thatcorrelate with effective policy engagement. We may summarize these as:

- Credibility, based on technical expertise, especially if drawn from a mix of fieldexperience and sound analysis;

- Scale of Influence, reflected in the scope of activities, the strength of institutionalalliances, and the p ower of the NGO’s constituency; and

- Autonomy , reflected in independence and the freedom to innovate and make decisionswith a high degree of discretion.

These attributes add up to leverage which, of course, is enhanced if the political environment isrelatively favorable.

3.4 Dilemmas for Local NGOs

This range of issues surrounding NGO advocacy points to several trade-offs that any NGO needsto carefully consider before making a strategic decision to enter the policy arena or, indeed, to



Page 7

not do so. Discussion around these issues, in the context of an organizational self assessmentthat facilitates some serious reflection, can be a learning opportunity for any local NGO. Thesedilemmas are:

- Investment in learning versus investment in doing : Serious policy influence usually

requires documented learning. But most NGOs pride themselves on being action-oriented, quick to respond to needs or to adapt to particular local situations. The valuesand skills that support commendable NGO flexibility and action-orientation, however,are not always consistent with reflection and learning nor the investment they require.

Nor is research a particularly compelling draw for fund-raising. So this trade-off between learning and doing becomes a strategic dilemma that an NGO needs address proactively.

- Policy awareness versus policy influence : Understanding and mastering theenvironment is a key tenet of good strategic management. So every NGO shoulddevelop the skills and mechanisms to understand the policy environment and how it will

affect what they are trying to do. Whether, however, any NGO goes beyond policyawareness to policy influence is another key strategic choice that may have significantramifications for its future work, both positive and negative.

- Insulation versus influence : As we noted earlier, insulation from government attentionor other activities that bring attention to an NGO, especially controversy, can be adeliberately chosen and effective strategy in some circumstances and for someorganizations. Such a strategy, however, may often be inconsistent with any drivetoward policy advocacy and influence whether direct or indirect. Here again the issue isnot whether one option is inherently better than the other but rather that any given NGOmake the choice deliberately and control its own future strategy.

- Independence versus partnership : There is a price to any partnership ranging from theneed to make strategic compromises to being co-opted by a larger partner with its ownagenda. The risks are especially large when a local NGO partners with a large foreign

partner or any NGO or PVO partners with government. The risks may be worth it in theinterests of expanding scale or obtaining support for key activities. And many U.S.PVOs, for example, are working creatively to build partnerships with local NGOs basedon equality and mutual self-respect. But even the appearance of being co-opted by aforeign partner may damage a local NGO ’s credibility and effectiveness, especially as avoice in the policy arena.

These dilemmas represent opportunities for effective strategic choice by an NGO. Too often,however, organizations back into one or the other horns of these dilemmas due to external

pressures, usually the pressure to raise funds or satisfy a stronger partner.

This reality brings us back to the heart of the issue for this conference – NGO sustainability.Organizations with sustainable capacity are much more likely to make independent decisionsthan organizations with what we might call dependent capacity.



Page 8

4 From Capacity to Sustainability

Thinking about autonomous decision making capacity as a key marker of NGO sustainabilitytakes us back to the third category of organizational assessment that I suggested earlier,organizational sustainability. I propose your consideration of three sub-categories of

organizational sustainability: autonomy, learning, and leadership. These attributes enable theorganization to transcend the sum of its component parts. They also are the most predictiveindicators I can think of to assess future organizational capacity.

4.1 Organizational Autonomy

Autonomy is the organization's degree of independence from other organizations or forces in itsenvironment. Effective autonomy is reflected in the power to make decisions about basicmatters such as organizational goals, policy, budget, hiring practices, pay and incentives, andexternal linkages.

Julie Fisher identifies several keys to organizational autonomy. These include- being driven by mission rather than by donors or other funding sources,- financial diversification from any single-source patron,- a mass constituency,- technical expertise,- strategic knowledge on development issues, and- social and managerial knowledge.

I’d also like to emphasize the importance for building autonomy of commitment to a clear senseof purpose. Institutions with a clear vision and internal consensus regarding that vision (oftenreferred to as “alignment”) usually employ resources effectively toward goal achievement

because they understand what they stand for. Autonomous organizations also tend to conduct programs or activities that earn a high degree of acceptance by relevant stakeholders and, in turn,contribute in demonstrable ways to organizational resources and performance -- for example, byattracting new funding, enhancing organizational learning, or broadening organizationalinfluence.

4.2 Organizational Learning

Much has been written and said about learning organizations and time does not permit muchexamination of the topic this morning. Recall, however, that organizational assessment itself can

be a powerful learning experience if done by an organization for itself or done in a highlyinteractive faction with a facilitating donor, consultant or partner organization. In fact just aboutanything an NGO does can be turned into a learning experience if done with creative attention to

process. In my view, fundamental organizational functions like planning, organizing, performance management, and human resource management all should be seen as key learningopportunities. For this reason, such functions should never be turned over to outsiders thoughconsulting expertise may be employed in a supportive role.





Page 10

5 NGOs and Civil Society

While many countries have developed decentralization programs, corresponding policies of political liberalization that foster the growth of civil society are often lacking or weak. This is notsurprising since civil society represents potentially uncontrollable opposition to political elites.

The development of civil society varies greatly among countries and regions. Latin America andthe Philippines, for example, have a fairly rich tradition of professional and communityassociations that play a large role in the political and economic life of the countries. On the otherhand, North and West Africa tend to have weak associative movements for historic cultural and

political reasons. In the transition countries of the former Soviet Union, the NGO sector is booming but possesses little institutional history or tradition in terms of roles in society andrelation to government.

We noted earlier that strengthening relations between government and civil society is a keyleverage point for increasing citizen access and influence and that two principal strategies

improve these relations: creating linkages and building capacity. Elections, public hearings, andother mechanisms for holding leaders accountable are a fundamental linkage that providescitizens the ability to influence decisions. Other linkages exist as a result of legislation thatrequires the local government to gather information from citizens regarding their needs andopinions, grant citizens access to council deliberations, or inform citizens of a pendinggovernment decision. For example, in the United States, state legislation typically requires localgovernments to have open meetings and public hearings before making certain key decisionssuch as budget approval, regulatory changes, and rezoning.

For the governance link between public officials and citizens to be effective, a useful interfaceincorporating communication, collaboration, problem-solving, and mutually beneficialinteraction must be created between government and a local community. These two sidesgenerally have their own major goals and value systems that often are not well understood orclosely linked. Indeed, they can be at odds with each other.

At the same time, as my Duke colleague Anirudh Krishna has argued, local government actionscan energize communities and community engagement can improve local government

performance. Local NGOs can help foster consent and participation that local governmentscannot often muster on their own. And local governments can provide technical resources andarrange for coordination with higher levels of government, which NGOs may find hard tomanage by themselves. Appropriately structured, partnerships between NGOs and localgovernments also can provide a basis of mutual learning at the local level.

Krishna adds that prospects for efficiency and sustainability are enhanced substantially whenlarge numbers of citizens are well informed, when they can participate in making publicdecisions, and when they act collectively in support of these decisions. Accountability improveswhen citizens empowered with adequate information can collectively mount pressure on localofficials. And democracy and equity are better served when large numbers of citizens knowabout programs and processes, when they can gain relatively easily access to public decisionmaking forums, and when they act collectively to enforce their rights. NGOs can serve as keyfacilitators in this process of citizen awareness, empowerment, and voice.



Page 11

John Clark presents the challenge in these terms: Local NGOs, he says, can blaze a new pathand pull politicians with them; there is an emerging community of local NGO activists who are,with varying degrees of formality and design, networking globally to tackle common issues thatconcern citizens and citizenship throughout the world.

The concepts of NGO networking and partnership and the growing role of civil society all cometogether in the context of globalization and a revolution in technology to create a potentopportunity for local NGOs.

As partners of these NGOs, you from the USAID and the U.S. PVO communities have asignificant facilitating role to play. It is my hope that the issues we have discussed this morningwill trigger thought and action among you and your colleagues that will help you fulfill this

powerful mandate.

Thank you.



Page 12

References

Kofi Annan, Nobel Prize speech, December 10, 2001.

John Clark, Worlds Apart: Civil Society and the Battle for Ethical Globalization (Kumarian, 2003)

Julie Fisher, Non Governments: NGOs and the Political Development of the Third World (Kumarian,1998).

Alan Fowler, Striking a Balance (Earthscan Publications, 1997).

Thomas Friedman, The Lexus and the Olive Tree (Anchor Books, 2000).

David C. Korten, “Third Generation NGO Strategies: A Key to People -Centered Development,” (WorldDevelopment, Vol 15, supplement, pp.145-159, 1987).

Anirudh Krishna, Partnerships between Elected Local Governments and Community-BasedOrganizations: Exploring the Scope for Synergy ( Public Administration and Development, August 2003forthcoming).

Marc Lindenberg and Coralie Bryant, Going Global: Transforming Relief and Development NGOs (Kumarian 2002).

Amartya Sen, Development as Freedom (Knopf, 1999).

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), AAide Memoire @ regarding the Asia MinisterialConference on Governance for Sustainable Growth and Equity in Lahore, Pakistan, 18-21 November1996 (UNDP, July, 1996).

U.S. Agency for International Development, Lessons in Implementation: the NGO Story (USAID, Bureaufor Eastern Europe and Eurasia, Office of Democracy and Governance, October 1999).

Jerry VanSant, Governance as Stewardship: Decentralization and Sustainable Human Development (Occasional Paper Series, American Society for Public Administration, Section on International andCooperative Administration, June 1997).

Jerry VanSant, Opportunities and Risks for Private Voluntary Organizations as Agents of LDC PolicyChange (World Development, Vol. 17, No. 11, pp.1723-1731, 1989).

Jerry VanSant, Institutional Self-Reliance: A Framework for Assessment (Research Triangle Institute,Center for International Development Working Paper, January, 1991).

Special thanks to Anirudh Krishna and Mikki Lee at Duke University for thoughtful review ofearlier drafts of these remarks

Documents

Challenges of Local NGO Sustainability